Alas, another punchline

I’m really glad you brought up weed legalization with Hillary Clinton Thursday night. This is how cynical lawmakers are here in Florida: Last week, the governor signed a bill that would allow taxpayers to burn a doobie only if they’re dying. That’s right, if you can prove the blood you’re puking is due to a terminal condition, Florida legislators have promised not to prosecute you for trying to feel better. Our representatives are obviously hoping voters here are sadistic and/or clueless enough to buy into Florida’s indecent new “Right To Try Act,” so that they’ll reject an upcoming medical marijuana referendum that would render Tallahassee’s idiocy irrelevant. The November referendum would extend marijuana palliatives to taxpayers suffering from cancer, epilepsy, glaucoma, HIV, PTSD, Crohn’s and Parkinson’s disease. Like, while they still have a chance to enjoy life.

Q: How come a talk-show comic is the only broadcaster in the U.S. who consistently asks politicians questions about UFOs? A: Because he’s in the entertainment division, not news? /CREDIT: elle.com

Anyway, dude, I’ve been trying to think of how many times I’ve heard debate moderators take marijuana to the presidential contenders lately and I’m drawing blanks. All I seem to remember are questions about how to nuke or strengthen Obamacare, or about which one of those suits packs enough crotch lumber to emasculate ISIS. So good on you, Jimmy, for asking questions the Fourth Estate treats like boogers.

I hate when people communicate in capital letters. It’s like whatever they’re trying to say is so lame it can’t stand up without visual crutches. So I own this lapse of judgment. It’s just that, sometimes, man, I forget you’re only a late-night talk-show comic instead of Charlie Rose or John Dickerson or Lester Holt or Gwen Ifill or any other news division talking head who should be asking these questions if only UFOs weren’t beneath their high thresholds for professional excellence.

And you had her going there, Jimmy, you had her. Clinton not only didn’t break out into hives when you mentioned The Great Taboo last week, she reiterated her comments from December about wanting to bring transparency to federal UFO records. Why am I so surprised by this? Why – given her alleged longstanding interest in this stuff, not to mention her campaign chairman’s decade-long efforts to swing this conversation into the mainstream – why am I so surprised to see the former Secretary of State exhibiting a level of conversational sophistication (e.g., preferring the acronym UAP over UFO) heretofore unimaginable for anyone running for president? Especially in an election year.

Here’s why I’m surprised: Because you’re the first human being to ask her about it on national TV. Nobody else does that. Ever. Except you do. You ask Bill Clinton about UFOs. You ask President Obama about UFOs. That means you’re, like, in my mind, Gayle King or Anderson Cooper or Wolf Blitzkrieg or whatever. You’re making history here. And you got HRC to say “Unless it’s a threat to national security, I think we oughtta share it with the public” if she finds classified UFO records. Which begs that logical followup question: How could UFOs affect national security? Only, your response was, “Well, what if everybody’s all hopped up on medical marijuana and everyone gets paranoid?”

AAAARGH! AIEEEEE!

Sorry (again). Anyhow. Jimmy. I know. You’re just a comedian. But thanks for the punchline setup anyway. It’s still better than anything we’re getting from CNN or NBC or XYzzzzzz …

Oh, and next time you see Trump, ask if he thinks he’s man enough to build the world’s most wonderful fabulous astounding quality reefer dispensary in the history of mankind.

16 comments on “Alas, another punchline”

@Billy,
Could you find a better name for your blog? ‘UNCATEGORIZED’ doesn’t sound cool enough.
Yes, most of my remarks are uncategorized, but I’m just a small voice, crying out in the wilderness….
. .. . .. — ….

Referring to Kimmel as a comedian is a stretch to begin with. (I.E.- “THROWAWAY LINE ABOUT PARANOID STONERS”). Which was not even remotely funny, and as Billy has pointed out, incredibly lame in light of the opportunity she had presented.

But Hillary unknowingly answered his “What if there IS something there?” question anyway when she immediately leaned back away from him and looked down to avoid eye contact before she lied to him about what she would do if there was something there.

I viewed the segment of the video @49-60 and noted her retreat. The HRC team laid the foundation of the topics and questions that could be discussed well in advance of the Kimmel interview so there would be no surprises and blindsighting. I have seen prior videos with other notable figures on the subject that were assessed by other body language experts from their remote locations. I am unsure if this was a retreat on her part unless i can view other interviews on topics where her level of comfort was compromised by unexpected questions.

@Joe: I just read the link. It always amazes me when a supposedly intelligent person uses one extreme interpretation of a situation, and tries to club everyone with it. Shostak doesn’t acknowledge BlueBook’s poor research and investigation practices. He doesn’t acknowledge that some people simply believe in open government. He doesn’t seem to understand that seeking answers and information doesn’t make a person a true believer.
He’s allowed to believe in the existence of alien life, but attacks anyone who thinks we may have been visited?

If you want to be a science superstar, you have to ‘stick to the script’, and keep those pesky aliens at a galaxies arms length. You must never challenge the Standard Model. Shostak is a lightweight in the field. Who knows what he really thinks? Smart people can be really stupid when it comes to matters of faith, whether religion, or science. The only guys who could have gotten away with challenging the system were Feynman, and possibly, Sagan.

It would be extremely cool to have recordings of those ‘pre-interview’ sessions, both at the station, and with the interviewees handlers.

One of my hobbies for many years is reading body language and at the 52 second mark when goofball asks her, “What if there is something there?”, Ms. Clinton’s body language screams, I’m not going to do jackshit if there is something there.

At least HRC stayed consistent in her views-Unlike many of the politicians and public officials
If she (HRC) finds classified UFO records.
That is a big ……………..”if”
To date the public in the UK and in North America have been informed that there is no national security threat. At least the “powers that be” understand this after collaborating on the QT for the past several years. I seem to recall former Presidents making inquiry on an unofficial basis and being circumvented by the bureaucratic system.
I still think that the Bernard Haisch website on the subject is pretty accurate pertaining to ” Would the President be briefed on a special UFO Access Program”(??)
With the uncanny ability to point out the obvious, i would venture to say that something else is going on here. Alexander Wendt’s recent POV may be right on the money pertaining to the unofficial policy on this matter-that is: “We acknowledge and are aware of the reality of the phenomena and cannot disclose our ignorance on the subject for reasons of maintaining societal and institutional stability”
The HRC/Kimmel exchange seems quite similar to the Aaron Rodgers recent interview on a comedy podcast. Too bad that George Knapp could not secure a national media position-but then he would be given his appropriate instructions to never “go there!”

Joe,
I doubt any President could get access to UFO data*. It’s probably compartmented in CIA files. The CIA may actually have authority over the military in such matters. A joint CIA/MIL venture would be a tough nut to crack.
——–
*except in an emergency, like an alien invasion. I wouldn’t hold my breath for that one:)